101 New London Road Newark, Delaware

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Historic Preservation Tax Credits The Process and Avoiding Common Problems National Park Service, Technical Preservation Services.
Advertisements

Historic Preservation Tax Credits The Process and Avoiding Common Problems Charles E. Fisher New York City, June 2009 National Park Service, Technical.
Historic Preservation and Affordable Housing National Historic Tax Credit Conference Chicago September 2008 Judith L. Kitchen, Ohio Historic Preservation.
The Minnesota State Historic Preservation Office & 106 Reviews
State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) ACMP Conference Juneau, AK 2007.
Cultural Resources Categorical Exclusion Training Class.
Introduction to EIS/EA Managing the Environmental & Project Development Process Presented by the Ohio Dept. of Transportation.
Program Alternatives under 36 CFR Part 800 Dave Berwick Army Affairs Coordinator Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.
NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT of 1966 as amended Garry J. Cantley Regional Archeologist Bureau of Indian Affairs.
IDENTIFYING & EVALUATING HISTORIC PROPERTIES NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES –CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION HISTORIC.
Woodland-Larchmere Commercial Historic District Cleveland, Shaker Heights, Cuyahoga County, Ohio National Register Public Hearing May 21, 2015 Barbara.
Dealing With Section 106: The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly.
NHPA, Section 106, and NEPA Highlights and Misconceptions.
Environmental Review Todd Levine Architectural historian, environmental reviewer, Connecticut Freedom Trail coordinator, Washington- Rochambeau Revolutionary.
Federal Preservation Activities: Part 1. What did With Heritage So Rich (1965) and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 provide to administer.
A BEGINNERS GUIDE TO SUCCESSFUL COMPLETION OF THE SECTION 106 REVIEW PROCESS TENNESSEE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE: REVIEW AND COMPLIANCE SECTION.
Connecticut Department of Transportation Bureau of Policy & Planning.
Sacred Sites. Documentation Documentation: Forest Supervisor or Ranger District Offices may document Sacred site (s) information in a variety of ways.
Driving Indiana’s Economic Growth. Management and Preservation of Indiana's Historic Bridges: A Programmatic Approach Thanks to Mead & Hunt & FHWA-IN.
THE FOUR STEP SECTION 106 PROCESS: AN INTRODUCTION TENNESSEE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE REVIEW AND COMPLIANCE SECTION All reproduction rights reserved.
COSCDA Workshop Renovation, Reconstruction and Renewal of Historic Properties and Neighborhoods Section 106 and Programmatic Agreements Overview.
Monroe Executed Programmatic Agreement The Army’s Responsibilities Include: Identify Significant Viewsheds (initiated)-18 Months =Oct 2010 Cultural Landscape.
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act ____________________ Review and Compliance for CDBG/CHIP Program Projects.
Florida Cultural Resources and How They Relate to Your Public Works Project Presented by: Brent Handley, MA, RPA Archaeology Division Director.
Acquisition, Technology and Logistics Ms. Maureen Sullivan Federal Preservation Officer Office of the Deputy Under Secretary of Defense (Installations.
Mitigation in the Section 106 Process Dave Berwick Army Program Manager Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.
Department of Natural Resources Historic Preservation Division Working Through The S106 Process FY 2015 CDBG Applicant Workshop December 4 th, 2014Meg.
CHAPTER 3 SCOPING AND AGENCY COORDINATION. Scoping - the procedure for determining the appropriate level of study of a proposed project/activity - process.
Productive SB 18 Consultation Michelle LaPena, Esq. LaPena Law Corporation 2001 N Street, Suite 100 Sacramento, CA (916)
1 ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING CULTURAL RESOURCES LAWS AND REGULATIONS CH 5 CH 5 HO # 13, 13a, 13b
Positive Train Control Infrastructure: Section 106 Review Process under the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation’s May 2014 Program Comment For More.
Nadine Peterson Preservation Planner NH Division of Historical Resources Lynne E. Monroe Preservation Company Christopher W. Closs Christopher W. Closs.
Integrating Other Laws into BLM Planning. Objectives Integrate legal requirements into the planning process. Discuss laws with review and consultation.
1 Overview of Minerals Management Service’s Alternative Energy Program Ocean Law Conference May 22, 2008 Seattle, WA Walter D. Cruickshank Deputy Director.
Environmental Review Process for Responsible Entities 24 CFR Part 58 NEIGHBORHOOD STABILIZATION PROGRAM.
Section 106: Historic Preservation Review and Compliance as it relates to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 “How Can State Agencies Assist.
3D Technology and the Section 106 Process Matt Diederich Archaeologist Oregon State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) Oregon Heritage Programs Division.
National Historic Districts And Why Taylor Should Be Among Them.
By Rachel Coleman.  “ The head of any federal agency having direct or indirect jurisdiction over a proposed federal or federally assisted undertaking.
The Extent of BLM Responsibility over Actions Occurring on Non-Federal Lands: Cultural Resources.
Department of Natural Resources Historic Preservation Division 1 Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act Review and Compliance for CDBG/CHIP.
1 Historic Preservation Webinar "Reporting Through PAGE and to PMC"
Categorical Exclusion Training Class
Historic Preservation Memoranda of Agreement. What is an MOA? As part of the Section 106 review process, it is an agreement among an agency official,
Raising the Bar: Improving the Roles of the State, MPO, and FHWA in Tribal Consultation Tribal Transportation Planning, Partnering and Consultation James.
South Dakota State Historic Preservation Office and the Nebraska National Forests and Grasslands July 24, 2013 National Grasslands Visitor Center.
Cultural Resources office — St. Louis Planning & Urban Design Agency an introduction.
Integration of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) NEPA and NHPA A Handbook for Integrating NEPA and.
The National Register. The National Register of Historic Places The National Register of Historic Places is authorized by Section 101 (a)(1)(A)of the.
Welcome to the Public Comment Hearing on the Proposed Regulatory Update to the California Environmental Quality Act AB 52, Gatto (2014) Heather Baugh Assistant.
National Treasures: Brownfields and the National Historic Preservation Act Brownfields 2006 Boston, MA.
BLM Decision Making Process
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Program Overview: Tribal Preservation Program and HPF Grants to Tribes
Placer County Water Agency Middle Fork American River Project FERC Project No February 26, 2008.
Monte Mills Alexander Blewett III School of Law University of Montana
Section 106 Consulting Parties Meeting
May 8, 2018 Marion Werkheiser, Cultural Heritage Partners
Overview of 2019 Non-BIA Federal Register Notice
Cultural Resources Categorical Exclusion Training Class – Presented by the Office of Environmental Services.
National Historic Preservation Act
National Historic Preservation Act
The Role of the SHPO John Pouley, Assistant State Archaeologist
NCHRP 25-25, TASK 106 HIGHWAY NOISE AND HISTORIC PROPERTIES:
Protecting What We Love Building What We Need – The “H” Factor
National Historic Preservation Act
National Historic Preservation Act
National Historic Preservation Act
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
New Hanover Comprehensive Plan
Presentation transcript:

101 New London Road Newark, Delaware PUBLIC MEETING 101 New London Road Newark, Delaware March 22, 2017

INTRODUCTIONS

OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT

THE SECTION 106 PROCESS

National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 Established the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Established State Historic Preservation Officer/ Tribal Historic Preservation Officers in each state/territory Undertakes statewide historic preservation planning and survey Nominates properties to the National Register of Historic Places Reviews and comments on Federal, State, and local undertakings Assists local governments with preservation programs and certifications

Section 106 of the NHPA If a project involves a federal agency, is using federal funds, or is being completed on federal land, the lead federal agency must determine if their undertaking will have an adverse effect on historic properties Historic property= Defined as a building, structure, site, object, or historic district that is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places

Section 106 is: A framework for problem solving; Grounded in consultation; Provides stakeholders access to Federal decision making; Results range from full preservation to total loss of historic properties

4 Steps for Completing the Section 106 Process: Initiate the Process Invite Consulting Parties to Participate in the Process Determine Area of Potential Effects (APE) Identify Historic Properties Identification of Resources Evaluation of Resources to determine “historic properties” Assess Adverse Effects Resolve Adverse Effects

PROJECT AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECTS (APE)

Area of Potential Effects (APE) APE: “The geographic area or areas within which an undertaking may cause changes in the character or use of historic properties, if any such properties exist.” Includes both direct and indirect impacts Direct= Physical impacts Indirect= Visual or other non-tangible impacts (can affect a resource’s setting and feeling)

APE for Project First, conducted a background review to identify previously recorded properties Second, performed a vehicular and pedestrian reconnaissance to note viewsheds Third, coordinated with HUD and the DE SHPO to get feedback on the APE Fourth, put together rough preliminary map based on this dialogue for your feedback

Proposed 101 New London Road APE (Direct and Indirect)

PREVIOUSLY RECORDED HISTORIC PROPERTIES

New London Road Historic District Recorded in 1998 43 Buildings, Mostly Dwellings (1860s-1930s) Eligible for the National Register of Historic Places under Criterion A for its association with African-American history and settlement in Newark 101 New London Road- Contributing Element

New London Road Historic District As outlined by Bradley Skelcher’s research, Urban African American Communities were often segregated by custom or regulation. Normally contained a church, school, and multiple residential buildings. Also often contained a commercial building, cemetery, and a community organization. Property ownership and tenancy predominately African American

NEXT STEPS

APE, Evaluation Studies, and Project Effect Present recommended APE to DE SHPO Complete archaeological reconnaissance study of 101 New London Street Assure all architectural properties over 40 years in age in APE have been identified and evaluated Determine project effects on historic properties

MOA & Mitigation of Adverse Effect Should it be determined that the project will have an adverse effect on historic properties, author a Memorandum of Agreement outlining steps required to mitigate adverse effect Complete mitigation tasks. Could include (among others): National Register nomination of New London District, interpretive signage, public talk on the history of the area, etc.

Dissemination of Information Information on these steps will be disseminated to interested parties as requested CONTACT INFO: HUD= Monica Hawkins & Ivan Chavez monica.a.hawkins@hud.gov / ivan.a.chavez@hud.gov (215) 861-7593 NHA= Marene Jordan MJordan@newarkhousingauthority.net (302) 366-0826 Dovetail= Kerri Barile & Brad Hatch kbarile@dovetailcrg.com / bhatch@dovetailcrg.com (540) 899-9170

THANK YOU